Refining Grit in Academic Performance: The Mediational Role of Psychological Capital

Abstract

Recent popular and academic attention is being given to the role that grit plays in important student outcomes. While gritty individuals are more likely to engage in deliberate practice and maintain commitment in the face of setbacks, what remains unclear are the cognitive processes linking grit and academic performance. Identifying the cognitive processes can play an important role in helping both students and educators apply grit in productive ways. The purpose of this study is to explore the mediational role that psychological capital (PsyCap) may play in the relationship between grit and student academic performance. Drawing from a sample (N = 176) of business students, the results indicate their PsyCap largely mediates the relationship between their grit and grade point averages. In other words, Academic PsyCap consisting of the psychological resources of hope, efficacy, resiliency, and optimism seem to help drive gritty students toward more successful academic performance. A discussion concerning the significance of these findings, as well as implications for management education, are provided.

Keywords

positive psychological capital grit academic performance

Introduction

About a decade ago, Duckworth and her colleagues carefully defined, as a positive psychological construct, the popular and widely used term “grit” (e.g., as used in the 1969 popular western film starring John Wayne in True Grit) “as a trait-level perseverance and passion for long-term goals” (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007, p. 1087). They noted that grit entails the capacity to sustain both effort and interest in tasks that take long periods of time to complete. They also reported that grit accounted for successful outcomes in the academic realm, such as grade point average among Ivy League undergraduate students, the retention of cadets at West Point, United States Military Academy, and rankings in the National Spelling Bee beyond ability (i.e., IQ) and the Big Five personality trait of conscientiousness.

Subsequent work also focused on the behavioral processes linking grit to academic performance. For example, research has shown that gritty individuals are likely to engage in more deliberate practice (Duckworth, Kirby, Tsukayama, Berstein, & Ericsson, 2011), persist in the face of adversity (Hochanadel & Finamore, 2015), and develop proactive learning strategies (Wolters & Hussain, 2015). However, a recent meta-analytic review indicated only a moderate correlation in the direct relationship between grit and academic performance (Credé, Tynan, & Harms, 2017). This modest relationship can be partially explained as the result of the stable “trait-like” nature of grit when compared to the contextually dependent nature of academic performance. For example, Credé et al. (2017) have noted that high levels of grit are most useful when applied to difficult but well-defined tasks. For tasks that are unique and therefore require both creativity and the willingness to abandon unsuccessful strategies to reach a goal, grit may be counterproductive. Here we use a distal-proximal framework to suggest that students with higher levels of grit may be able to develop “state-like” cognitive resources that allow them to apply grit in more productive ways. Importantly, we argue that it is the transformation of trait-like grit to a cognitive process that explains the modest but significant relationship between grit and academic performance. Understanding these cognitive linkages can be critical to better understanding the grit academic performance relationship because it offers flexible interventions to educators rather than solely prescribing specific behavioral applications of grit.

Besides the underemphasized role that grit may play in management education is the seemingly related, but we propose conceptually and empirically distinct from grit, core construct of positive psychological capital (PsyCap; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). This now widely recognized construct of PsyCap consists of the positive psychological resources of hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism (i.e., the “HERO” within) and has been clearly demonstrated to be a higher order core construct (Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007) and positively related to a variety of employee attitudinal, behavioral, and performance outcomes (Avey, Reichard, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2011; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Additionally, and of most relevance to this study, PsyCap has been demonstrated in empirical studies to contribute to desired management education outcomes such as academic performance (Luthans, Luthans, & Jensen, 2012), student engagement (Luthans, Luthans, & Palmer, 2016), and student adjustment (Hazan Liran & Miller, 2017).

To date, in management education research, there have been no empirical studies analyzing the relationship between grit and PsyCap and their relationship with academic performance. Furthermore, there is little empirical evidence explaining how cognitive processes might explain the grit academic performance relationship. The lack of clarity regarding the relationships of these two important emerging constructs and the mechanisms by which grit relates to student outcomes limits evidence-based recommendations for management educators. Given the positive impact PsyCap has been shown to have in management education and the increasing recognition of the role grit may play in personal success in positive psychology (Duckworth, 2013), the specific purpose of this study is to examine whether college students’ PsyCap mediates the effect of grit on their academic performance by influencing their hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism.

Grit and Academic Performance

It has been well documented over the years that cognitive ability is a good predictor of positive outcomes not only in the workplace (e.g., Kranzler & Jensen, 1989; Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2004) but also in academic settings (e.g., Bridgeman, McCamley-Jenkins, & Ervin, 2000; Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2008; Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2001; Sackett et al., 2012). Similarly, dispositional personality traits such as the “Big Five” have been shown to be positively related to both workplace performance (e.g., Salgado, 1997) and academic performance (e.g., Komarraju, Karau, & Schmeck, 2009; O’Connor & Paunonen, 2007), with the Big Five trait of conscientiousness consistently showing the strongest positive correlation with workplace performance (e.g., Barrick & Mount, 1991; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991). However, beyond these classic factors, Duckworth’s identified trait of grit has recently gained increased recognition as an important predictor of performance outcomes. Of relevance to this study is that college students’ grit may be a good predictor of their academic endeavors.

Grit has been demonstrated to be a noncognitive trait with two fundamental factors, consistency of interest and perseverance of effort (Duckworth et al., 2007). It encompasses working vigorously to overcome challenging situations through sustainable effort over time, even in the face of conflicts, constraints, and adversity. Those who possess a lot of grit, or are gritty individuals, achieve at high-levels because they have a clear vision of purpose and direction and do not give up when mishaps and setbacks happen that would debilitate less gritty people and cause them to quit. Instead, they have the persistence and resolve to keep moving forward to reach their objectives, even over long-periods of time if necessary (Duckworth et al., 2007).

Grit is distinguishable from the well-established psychological resource (and one of the key components that make up PsyCap) of resilience. The two constructs are certainly related, because part of grit is the resiliency to overcome obstacles and challenges. However, Duckworth (2007) has argued that grit is about more than resilience. Grit involves strong commitments that people remain obligated to over multiple years, not exclusively about having resilience in the face of short-term setbacks or failures (Perkins-Gough, 2013). In addition to resilience, there are other classic attributes that factor into high levels of grit, including conscientiousness (extent to which a person is dependable and responsible) and self-control (extent to which an individual can control impulses and regulate emotions). However, Willingham (2016, p. 30) notes the following conceptual distinction: “Conscientiousness means doing what you’re supposed to do right now, and self-control means avoiding impulses to do something else. Grit emphasizes passion for one goal that you stick with for a ‘long time.’” In sum, being gritty entails pursuing one’s passion by making the choice to invest time and psychological resources to a specific endeavor and potentially even dropping many other things to stay steadfast in this pursuit (Bashant, 2014). While some researchers have challenged the distinctiveness of grit as it relates to similar constructs such as conscientiousness (Credé et al., 2017), Duckworth and colleagues (Duckworth & Seligman, 2017) have made the counterargument that self-control constructs such as grit can reliably predict important outcomes worthy of further study.

Extant research has consistently shown that grit is positively and at least moderately related to successful outcomes in academic settings. For example, one study demonstrated that grit mediated the relationship between motivation and grade point averages (GPA) of undergraduate college students (Rojas, 2015). Another study investigated the learning processes linking grit and academic performance, namely student self-regulated learning as a mediator (Wolters & Hussain, 2015). Self-regulated learning includes subprocesses, including goal setting, using prior knowledge, progress monitoring, learning strategies, and reflection. This Wolters and Hussain (2015) study showed that self-regulated learning partially mediates the relationship between perseverance and academic performance. In multiple other studies, grit has been demonstrated to be a significant predictor of GPA among undergraduate college students (e.g., Bowman, Hill, Denson, & Bronkema, 2015; Duckworth et al., 2007). Additionally, Strayhorn (2014) found that grit was a good predictor of GPA for Black male students attending a predominantly White populated college institution. Finally, Hwang, Lim, and Ha (2018) found that grit was positively related to GPA for female students at a Korean university, giving the construct some cross-cultural applicability.

In a widely publicized study of Chicago high school students, grit was found to be a good predictor of on-time graduation rates (Eskreis-Winkler, Duckworth, Shulman, & Beal, 2014). Other highly publicized studies led by Duckworth showed that grit enabled students competing in the National Spelling Bee to persist and be successful while implementing the type of rigorous practice activities that are not necessarily intrinsically rewarding (Duckworth et al., 2011) and found that grit was a better predictor in the retention of cadets at West Point than their high school rank, self-control, or even SAT score. In still another study of pharmacy students, those with higher grit scores were more likely to pursue and ultimately obtain postgraduate training positions (Palisoc et al., 2017). In summary of the research evidence, it is apparent that grit is a distinct trait that is related to many positive, success-related outcomes in academic settings.

Foundation for Psychological Capital

Around the turn of the century, then American Psychological Association president Martin Seligman made a call for increased research that shifted the field of psychology away from its almost sole preoccupation with pathological/dysfunctional human functioning and toward a more balanced concern for the optimization of human functioning (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The positive psychology movement challenged researchers to use scientific methodology to investigate factors that build upon the positive features of people (e.g., flourishing, vitality), rather than being primarily concerned with negative aspects of human functioning (e.g., depression, dysfunction).

Answering this call for positive psychology, Luthans (2002a, 2002b) identified and demonstrated the effectiveness and applicability of positive psychological resources in the workplace and called it “Positive Organizational Behavior” (POB), defined as “the study and application of positively oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace” (Luthans, 2002b, p. 59). He set specific scientific, inclusion criteria that distinguish POB and its constructs from other positively oriented organizational behavior constructs. First, they are based on theory and research. Second, they use reliable and valid measures. Third, they are “state-like” and open to change and development. Finally, they must demonstrate impact on desired outcomes (Luthans, 2002a; Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007).

A direct outgrowth from POB was the emergence of Psychological capital, or simply PsyCap, which was identified as going beyond traditional economic capital (“what you have”), human capital (“what you know”), and social capital (“who you know”), and consists of “who you are” and, of most importance for developmental ramifications, “what you can become” (Luthans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004). The widely recognized positive psychology constructs that best met the inclusionary scientific criteria outlined above were hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism and when combined were conceptually (Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007) and empirically (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007) demonstrated to form a second-order core construct of PsyCap defined as

an individual’s positive psychological state of development characterized by: (1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering toward the goals, and when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even beyond (resilience) to attain success. (Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007, p. 3)

As highlighted, an important requirement for PsyCap is that it is a “state-like” capacity. Previous research has shown that each of the four capacities that comprise PsyCap have all, to some degree, been demonstrated to be malleable and open to change and development. For example, various clinical studies have validated that hope can be developed through a goals-based, contingency planning framework (Snyder, 2000). Efficacy has been demonstrated to be enhanced through mastery experiences, modeling, social persuasion, and physiological/psychological arousal (Bandura, 1997). Various methods have proven successful in building resilience, including altering perceived levels of risk and applying asset-focused strategies (Masten, 2001). Finally, Schneider’s (2001) three-step process, which includes having leniency for the past, appreciation for the present, and opportunity for the future, can be an effective framework for enhancing optimism. Luthans and colleagues have also validated the ability to affect positive psychological capital levels using the PsyCap Intervention (PCI) training model (Luthans, Avey, Avolio, Norman, & Combs, 2006). To briefly summarize, the PCI training program utilizes a combination of goal setting, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and asset-building techniques to positively influence the PsyCap levels of participants. The effectiveness of the PCI model in developing PsyCap has been demonstrated in a variety of studies in the workplace (Luthans, Avey, Avolio, & Peterson, 2010), online (Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008), with college students (Luthans, Luthans, & Avey, 2014), and the rigorous Solomon four group design (Ertosun, Erdil, Deniz, & Alpkan, 2015).

A large and continually growing body of research has clearly shown the positive core construct of PsyCap is significantly related to employee attitudes (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007; Schulz, Luthans, & Messersmith, 2014), behaviors (Simbula, Guglielmi, & Schaufeli, 2011; de Waal & Pienaar, 2013), and performance (Avey, Nimnicht, & Pigeon, 2010; Mathe, Scott-Halsell, Kim, & Krawczyk, 2014; Paterson, Luthans, & Jeung, 2014) in the workplace. In a comprehensive meta-analytic review, which included 51 independent samples and 12,567 employees, PsyCap was found to be positively and significantly related to desirable work attitudes such as job satisfaction, commitment, and psychological well-being and positively associated with indicators of workplace performance such as self-rated performance, supervisor ratings of performance, and other objective measures such as sales and manufacturing rejection rates (Avey et al., 2011).

Beyond these direct relationships, the role of PsyCap as a mediating variable has attracted the attention of researchers from a variety of contexts and industries including health care, education, and business. For example, in a recent study that examined the relationship between job stress and job satisfaction among township officials in China, PsyCap was found to be a key mediating variable (Guan, Li, & Ma, 2017). In a comprehensive study that included three diverse samples of business students, high-tech manufacturing workers, and insurance industry employees, PsyCap was found to mediate the relationship between a supportive work climate and performance (Luthans, Norman, Avolio, & Avey, 2008). PsyCap has also been demonstrated to mediate the relationship between occupational stress and job burnout among bank employees (Li e al., 2015) and work–family conflict and depressive symptoms among nurses (Hao, Wu, Liu, Li, & Wu, 2015).

Academic PsyCap

Considerable research has established strong linkages between each of the individual psychological resources that comprise PsyCap and successful academic outcomes. Hope is defined as a “positive motivational state based on an interactively derived sense of successful (a) agency (“willpower”) and (b) pathways (“waypower”)” (Snyder, Irving, & Anderson, 1991, p. 287). In a 6-year longitudinal study of college students, Snyder et al. (2002) found that higher hope scores among incoming freshmen was a significant predictor of overall grade point averages, even after controlling for entrance exam scores. Students with higher self-reported levels of hope also were more likely to stay in school and ultimately graduate.

Stemming from his social cognitive theory, Bandura (1997) found that people with higher efficacy will put forth greater effort toward task accomplishment and remain steadfast in those efforts when encountering problems or obstacles in comparison to those who have lower levels of efficacy. Numerous research studies have found significant and positive relationships between higher levels of self-efficacy and academic performance (e.g., Richardson, Abraham, & Bond, 2012; Valentine, DuBois, & Cooper, 2004). Finally, self-efficacy has been found to serve as a mediating variable that can influence students’ levels of effort, persistence, and perseverance (Zeldin & Pajares, 2000).

Resilience “refers to a class of phenomena characterized by patterns of positive adaption in the context of significant adversity or risk” (Masten & Reed, 2002, p. 75). Resilient individuals learn to better cope with mistakes, failures, and setbacks and do not allow bad circumstances to keep them from performing at high levels. These psychological resources seem especially relevant for success in the academic domain. For example, Wasonga, Christman, and Kilmer (2003) have noted that resilient students exhibit a sense of competence and good problem-solving skills. They have high self-esteem, self-control, malleability, even temper, and openness to new experiences. In a separate study, Martin and Marsh (2006) found that students’ academic resilience levels were strong predictors of important outcomes such as class participation, enjoyment of school, and general self-esteem.

Seligman (1998) has defined an optimistic explanatory style as one that attributes positive events to personal, permanent, and pervasive causes and tend to attribute their problems to temporary, specific, and external causes. Optimism as a component of PsyCap is associated with a positive outlook but is not an unchecked process without realistic evaluation (Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007). Based on prior research, differences in explanatory style can have a significant impact on academic success. For example, empirical studies have demonstrated that students with more optimistic styles significantly outperform those with pessimistic styles in the classroom (e.g., El-Anzi, 2005; Solberg, Evans, & Swgerstrom, 2009).

As reviewed, research has linked each of the individual components of PsyCap with positive academic outcomes. However, confirmatory factor analyses have also demonstrated support for the notion that the shared variance between each component comprises a higher order construct that predicts performance in a variety of contexts better than any of the individual resources contained within PsyCap (Baron, Franklin, & Hmieleski, 2013; Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007). Therefore, while each variable is independently relevant in predicting important academic outcomes, when combined, these four psychological resources create a synergistic effect that affects performance greater than the effect any one individual component (Dawkins, Martin, Scott, & Sanderson, 2013; Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007). Empirical studies have demonstrated the synergistic effect of PsyCap on positive academic outcomes such as academic performance (Luthans et al., 2012; Tjakraatmadja & Febriansyah, 2007), students’ psychological well-being (Qingquan & Zongkui, 2009), student engagement (Luthans et al., 2016; Siu, Bakker, & Jiang, 2014), academic adjustment (Hazan Liran, & Miller, 2017), and collaboration and learning in online environments (Daspit, Mims, & Zavattaro, 2015). This body of research demonstrates support for successful students having higher levels of hope in terms of their ability and motivation to create alternative pathways to reach their academic goals, strong efficacy beliefs in their ability to confidently pursue academic objectives, resilience in the face of uncertainty, conflict, failure, and setbacks, and realistic optimism about attaining positive academic performance outcomes.

Distal “Traits” Versus Proximal “States”

Understanding how grit relates to academic performance through PsyCap can be conceptualized using a distal-proximal framework. The distal-proximal framework has been broadly articulated in motivation and cognitive theories and performance (Kanfer, 1990, 1992). For example, Barrick and Mount (2005) suggested personality traits (conceptually similar to grit) serve a distal motivational function influencing behaviors through more proximal motivational variables (conceptually similar to Academic PsyCap). Kanfer (1990) notes that distal traits refer to stable and general constructs like personality (and grit) and when explaining motivation and performance, distal constructs usually precede proximal ones and have an indirect effect on actions through processes like goal choice and intended future efforts (like Academic PsyCap). This distal-proximal framework maintains that distal constructs orient an individual toward a given domain with resources and intentions that can assist the individual when engaged in a task.

Compared to distal constructs, proximal constructs are more closely related to specific performance outcomes. Proximal theories and constructs operate at the level of purposive action and focus on mechanisms that control initiation and execution of actions when performing the task (Kanfer 1990, 1992). Initiation and execution are critical to the performance outcomes of a given task. Not all theoretical models necessarily include distal and proximal constructs. The inclusion of proximal motivational constructs is particularly important in tasks and goals that require sustained effort, developing new skills and when goals are not quickly realized. In these cases, the proximal mechanisms play a more significant role in translating distal attributes into actions for increased performance (Kanfer 1990).

The distal-proximal framework has been used by Lanaj, Chang, and Johnson (2012) to explain how distal personality traits such as conscientiousness, openness to experience, and agreeableness relate to work behaviors through the mediating effects of a regulatory focus. In this framework, they noted that distal personality traits are unlikely to have direct effects on work behaviors because they are general and stable constructs, yet they may have indirect effects via various forms of regulatory focus, partly due to their sensitivity to context. They used an example of a conscientious individual studying for a professional certification exam. A person with a strong regulatory focus would engage in promotion-focused strategies aimed at the goal of passing the exam (e.g., taking online practice quizzes). Also, an individual with a high regulatory focus would engage in prevention-focused strategies and abstain from counterproductive behaviors (e.g., watching TV for leisure). In this model, distal personality traits such as conscientiousness serve as antecedents to a promotion and prevention regulatory focus. In this way, a regulatory focus would be considered more proximal to performance and, therefore, serve as a mediating variable in the relationship between personality and performance (i.e., passing the professional certification exam).

Using a similar framework, we argue that grit is a distal personality trait that indirectly influences academic performance via the more proximal mechanism of Academic PsyCap. Grit has been defined as sustained interest and effort that are not necessarily open to change and development (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009). Duckworth et al. (2007) noted gritty individuals work strenuously toward challenges, maintaining effort and interest over years, despite adversity. This long-term orientation of the grit construct denotes the distal and trait-like characteristics of grit. Not only is grit distal as it relates to behavior, but it is also more general because it is domain neutral. The distal nature of grit suggests that it is likely to direct individuals to identify general intentions and goals as it relates to their academic pursuits.

Academic PsyCap, on the other hand, has been demonstrated to be more state-like and open to change through development techniques (Luthans, Avey, et al., 2010; Luthans et al., 2014). In addition, Academic PsyCap is more domain-specific than grit. General grit encompasses an individual’s perseverance and passion for long-term goals and long-term stamina as it relates to those goals (Duckworth et al., 2007). Academic PsyCap is a specific type of psychological resource that relates to an individual’s efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience toward attaining academic success often within a particular context. Using the previously reviewed definition of PsyCap developed by Luthans, Youssef, et al. (2007), and modified for a domain-specific application in the academic realm (e.g., “having confidence to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging academic tasks”). Academic PsyCap is considered a domain-specific, state-like psychological resource that is more proximal to academic success than the relatively distal, fixed, noncognitive trait of grit.

The distinction of trait and state is important when understanding PsyCap as a mechanism by which grit may be related to academic performance. General trait-like constructs such as grit are likely to give rise to state-like motivational cognitive constructs such as Academic PsyCap (Kanfer, 1990). Grit and Academic PsyCap do cover similar conceptual ground, namely resilience and perseverance, although at differing levels of analysis with grit focusing on distal, stable, long-range ambitions such as career or degree level (Duckworth et al., 2007). Academic PsyCap, on the other hand, focuses on resilience and perseverance as it relates to more proximate behaviors such as studying and preparing for a certain course or GPA within a given program (Luthans et al., 2012).

Within our framework, the link between grit and PsyCap comprises the action theory of our model, or the connection between trait-level individual differences and state-level attitudes and beliefs (Chen, 1990; MacKinnon, Coxe, & Baraldi, 2012). Differences in the level of grit for a given individual is likely to be related to the level of PsyCap because of the cognitive and behavioral processes. Thus, while they operate at different levels, the behaviors and attitudes associated with Grit are likely to manifest in PsyCap.

Cognitively, traits represent more stable facets of individuals that play an important role in how they understand their environment. Traits can be a lens by which individuals interpret the world around them, which influences their transient states (Ilies, Scott, & Judge, 2006). Individuals with higher levels of grit are more likely to interpret obstacles and setbacks as something they can overcome and thus see the world through the lens of resilience and hope. Through cognitive processes then, grittier individuals are more likely to experience PsyCap.

Individuals with higher levels of grit are also more likely to have experiences that foster PsyCap. Gritty individuals are likely to persist in challenges and come to recognize their own resilience and efficacy components of PsyCap in the face of challenges. Less gritty individuals conversely are more likely to become discouraged, eager to quit and have less impulse control and thus be less likely to experience PsyCap states (Sansone, Wiebe, & Morgan, 1999). Thus, behavioral mechanisms are also likely to link grit with PsyCap. In our proposed model, Academic PsyCap and its subcomponents of efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience are malleable mechanisms that influence (mediate) the relationship between grit and academic performance. Efficacy represents one’s convictions about successfully executing a course of action that leads to a desired outcome (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). Going further, efficacy represents an awareness of the resources needed to make a choice, welcome a challenge, and a belief that one’s capabilities will be sufficient to complete a task. Therefore, while grit may provide passion and persistence for long-term goals, one also needs a belief in their capabilities and an awareness of the resources needed to sustain effort over time to reach long-term goals.

Hope and optimism also provide an important link between grit and academic performance. Undergraduate students often face significant stress as they manage the diversity and volume of tasks associated with a degree program (Swick, 1987). Stress weakens academic performance as students engage in counterproductive coping behaviors to deal with negative emotions (Arsenio & Loria 2014). The optimism and hope components of Academic PsyCap can play an important role in applying the persistence of grit toward attitudes and beliefs that lead to more productive behaviors. High hope individuals are able to generate alternative pathways to reach their goals. Students with a realistic sense of optimism are more likely to generate a positive internal dialogue (self-talk) and attribute positive events in their lives to more permanent and pervasive causes. Drawing from these psychological resources, students can manage stress and cope with challenging situations in more productive ways (Avey, Luthans, & Jensen, 2009).

Resilience also links grit to successful academic outcomes. High academic performance requires ongoing adjustment, initiating courses of action and deployment of resources to accomplish the task. This task complexity suggests grit is unlikely to directly relate to the outcome but rather grit indirectly influences academic performance through a state-like motivational construct that enables students to adjust, plan and organize to perform well (Kanfer 1992). Because of these varying demands, state-like behaviors arising from resilience can be critical to adjust to these changing demands, initiate action, and navigate multiple paths toward successful academic performance. Furthermore, the state-like aspects of Academic PsyCap means that its resources of efficacy, optimism, hope and resilience are likely to be strategic expressions of grit.

The Academic PsyCap literature (Luthans et al., 2014) has suggested that Academic PsyCap is sensitive to contextual cues and events that can orient individuals toward specific behaviors related to academic performance. For example, PsyCap is likely to be related to an individual’s openness to development and change (Avey, Wernsing, & Luthans, 2008) or toward constructive attitudes toward learning (Luthans et al., 2004) that are likely to be strongly related with academic performance. Furthermore, the ongoing adjustment and flexibility of Academic PsyCap enables students to respond constructively to varying performance demands of academic courses. Thus, we propose the trait-like nature of grit serves as a key predictor of Academic PsyCap that is more state-like and could represent a strategic manifestation of grit toward academic performance. Given this theoretical background, we proposed and tested the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: The relationship between grit and academic performance is partially mediated by Academic PsyCap.

Method

Sample and Procedure

To gather data and test the study hypothesis, 176 undergraduate business students were surveyed and asked to self-report their levels of Academic PsyCap and grit. The sample was drawn from undergraduate students in the business program taking core business classes in organizational behavior, principles of marketing, and managerial accounting. Students varied from freshmen to seniors at a medium-sized public university in the Midwest. There was a 95% response rate for the subjects selected for this study. Information concerning the self-reported levels of grit, Academic PsyCap, and demographic type of control variables were collected on a single survey in March 2017 and with a different group of students in September of 2017. Corresponding GPA data for all responding students were collected from the Office of Student Records in May of 2018. The time lag between data collection points created temporal separation and strengthened the argument regarding the causal order of the proposed framework.

Measures

Academic PsyCap was measured with the 24-item PsyCap Questionnaire originally validated by Luthans, Avolio, et al. (2007) and adapted and validated for the academic domain (Luthans et al., 2012; Luthans et al., 2014; Luthans et al., 2016) using student-oriented, academic language such as with regard to the survey respondent’s school work instead of work (e.g., “If I should find myself in a jam about my school work, I could think of many ways to get out of the jam” and “I always look on the bright side things regarding my school work”). Respondents rated their agreement on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Reliability, as measured by Cronbach’s alpha for the adapted Academic PsyCap measure in this sample, was α = .914.

Grit was assessed using the validated 8-item Short Grit Scale (e.g., “New ideas and projects sometimes distract me from previous ones” and “I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost interest”; Duckworth & Quinn, 2009). Respondents rated their agreement on a 5-point scale (1 = very much like me, 5 = not at all like me). The Cronbach’s alpha for the Short Grit Scale used in this study was α = .732.

Finally, academic performance was measured by GPA. As an objective measure that demonstrates good internal reliability, temporal stability, and criterion-related validity (e.g., Bacon & Bean, 2006; Korbin, Patterson, Shaw, Mattern, & Barbuti, 2008), GPA is the most widely studied index of academic performance (Richardson et al., 2012). The validity and reliability of GPA has been questioned in the past due to issues related to grade inflation (Johnson, 2003) and institutional grading differences (Didier, Kreiter, Buri, & Solow, 2006). However, as a significant predictor of graduate school selection and persistence (Kuncel, Crede, & Thomas, 2007), job performance (Roth, BeVier, Switzer, & Schippmann, 1996), and employment opportunities (Plant, Ericsson, Hill, & Asberg, 2005), GPA is a meaningful measure of academic performance. Data were also collected related to several control variables that could potentially be correlated with grit. These controls included gender, ethnicity, age, and part-time versus full-time academic status.

Results

As indicated, the major aim of this study was to explore and refine the mechanisms by which grit leads to academic performance. Specifically, we hypothesized that the relationship between grit and academic performance is partially mediated by Academic PsyCap. To assess this relationship, bivariate correlations were calculated and significant relationships between the key study variables were found. The results indicated a significant and positive relationship between the self-reported levels of Academic PsyCap and grit (r = .46, p < .01) for the subjects in this study. Because of the relatively high correlation between grit and Academic PsyCap, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to ensure the constructs were empirically distinct. The first model loaded all the items on a single factor and the second model loaded the grit items and Academic PsyCap on two separate factors. We conducted a chi-square difference test comparing the model fit of the two models and found that the two-factor model was statistically a better fit than the single factor model (Δχ² = 143.21, df = 1, p > .001). These results indicate that grit and Academic PsyCap are empirically different constructs. The correlations and summary statistics for the focal and control variables are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables.

Variable	Mean	SD	Minimum	Maximum	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Grit	3.54	0.59	1.75	4.63
2. Academic PsyCap	4.49	0.61	2.38	6	0.46
3. Acad. Perf. (GPA)	3.18	0.47	1.96	4	0.14	0.24
4. Female	0.51	0.5	0	1	0.07	0.11	0.09
5. Non-White	0.21	0.45	0	3	−0.01	0.08	−0.09	0.11
6. Age	23.33	5.75	18	51	0.09	0.08	−0.13	0.01	−0.05
7. Part-Time	0.02	0.15	0	1	0.05	0.05	−0.15	0.07	0.35	−0.02

Note. PsyCap = psychological capital; Acad. Perf. = academic performance; GPA = grade point average. N = 176. Correlations > |0.15| are significant at p < .05.

Next, we tested a mediation model that included grit, Academic PsyCap, and student academic performance based on Preacher and Hayes’ (2004) approach for testing indirect effects in Stata using the sgmediation command. Each of the models included student age, gender, ethnicity, and part-time student status as control variables. The mediation test considered the relationship between the independent and dependent variables with and without the mediator. Indirect tests, which included the Sobel Test and the Preacher and Hayes (2004) bootstrapped formula, evaluated whether the effect of the independent variable was significantly reduced when the mediator was included in the model. This test also evaluated the statistical significance of the indirect effects with a 95% confidence interval. The results from the mediation test are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Ordinary Least Squares Regression Coefficients Predicting Student Performance and Academic Psychological Capital.

Criterion	Model 1—Academic Performance, B (SE)	Model 2—Academic PsyCap, B (SE)	Model 3—Academic Performance, B (SE)
Grit	0.071* (0.035)	0.454*** (0.068)	0.020 (0.039)
Age	−0.069* (0.035)	0.038 (0.068)	−0.073* (0.034)
Female	0.094 (0.070)	0.140 (0.136)	0.078 (0.069)
Non-White	−0.060 (0.083)	0.172 (0.162)	−0.079 (0.082)
Part-Time	−0.450 (0.249)	−0.009 (0.484)	−0.449 (0.244)
Academic PsyCap			0.111** (0.039)
Constant	3.156*** (0.051)	−0.107 (0.099)	3.168*** (0.050)
R ²	0.074	0.226	0.117
N	176	176	176

Note. SE = standard error; PsyCap = psychological capital.

p < .05. **p < .01.***p < .001.

As shown in Table 2, the first Model indicated that grit had a positive and significant relationship with academic performance (Β = 0.071, p = .045). As indicated in Model 2, grit had a positive and significant relationship with Academic PsyCap (Β = 0.454, p = .000). Finally, for partial mediation to exist, the strength of the relationship between the independent variable and the outcome variable should be reduced when the mediating variable is included in the model. As demonstrated in Model 3, the direct effect of grit to academic performance was reduced when the mediator is included in the model (Β = 0.020, p = .598). Furthermore, the Sobel test, which measures the magnitude of the indirect effect of grit and academic performance through Academic PsyCap, was significant (Β = 0.050, p = .009). Finally, to establish a bias corrected confidence interval of the indirect effect, we conducted a bootstrap estimation on the sample with 1,005 replications that estimated the 95% confidence interval of [0.026, 0.155]. Collectively, these results indicated support for the study hypothesis that the positive relationship between grit and academic performance was largely mediated by academic PsyCap. The path model for this relationship is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Mediated path analysis for grit, academic psychological capital, and academic performance.

Discussion

Various research studies have demonstrated that grit is an important predictor of academic performance. While academic research, as well as the popular and professional education literature, continues to build with regard to the positive impact of grit on important academic outcomes at all levels, recent empirically based criticism (Credé et al., 2017) points to the need for better understanding of the theoretical and psychological mechanisms by which grit leads to student academic performance. In this study, we proposed that Academic PsyCap is a proximate, domain-specific, and malleable psychological core construct that mediates the relationship between grit and academic performance. As hypothesized, our analysis of undergraduate business students indicated support for the indirect influence Academic PsyCap has in mediating the relationship between grit and academic performance.

As previously defined, grit refers to perseverance and passion for attaining long-term goals (Duckworth et al., 2007). Although several studies have demonstrated a significant grit-academic performance linkage, others have failed to find strong relationships between grit scores and indicators of academic performance. For example, in the recent large-scale meta-analytical review that involved dozens of studies and thousands of subjects, Credé et al. (2017) found only a modest relationship between grit and college student GPAs and their intent to persist in college. Going further, these researchers noted that when controlling for conscientiousness, grit was found to explain only a small amount of incremental variance in college student GPAs. Although a modest, but significant relationship between grit and GPA was identified in the present study, Credé et al. (2017) pointed out the possibility that high levels of grit might become dysfunctional if it reduces the likelihood of help-seeking behaviors or if it drives an individual to persist too long at attempting to solve a complex problem instead of spending time on more relevant and attainable tasks.

In this article, we contributed to a deeper understanding of the grit construct by emphasizing the mediating relationship of PsyCap. Importantly, we argue that it is the transformation of trait-like grit to state-like PsyCap that explains the modest but significant relationship between grit and academic performance. More specifically, the within individual variance of grit is likely to be lower than that of PsyCap. Also, that academic performance requires frequent adaptation of grit to specific applications and contexts. Thus, the direct relationships among these variables is likely to be modest because of their different levels of consistency within individuals. Therefore, just as stable personality traits must be applied to specific performance contexts through psychological states like regulatory focus, the value to academic performance of grit is indirect through PsyCap.

In sum, based on previous research in both grit and PsyCap, and the results of the present study, we propose a more nuanced conceptualization of grit’s contribution to academic performance. We argue that the psychological resources that comprise Academic PsyCap can orient and drive students that are passionate and persistent to reach their long-term goals in more domain-specific ways. For example, the hope positive psychological resource of Academic PsyCap might help gritty individuals maintain their motivation to strive toward their academic goals by helping them form alternative pathways to reach success. The efficacy resource could assist students that are passionately and persistently striving toward their academic goals to maintain their belief and confidence about their abilities and to mobilize the appropriate resources needed to successfully execute a specific task related to the attainment of broader academic outcomes. The psychological resource of resilience could help individuals overcome dramatic positive and negative short-term setbacks in their lives in the pursuit of long-term academic performance. Finally, having a realistic sense of optimism about long-term goals could help gritty individuals objectively assess the resources they need to passionately and persistently reach their long-term academic goals. Furthermore, the state-like dimension of PsyCap suggests that students who are passionate and persistent toward reaching their academic goals could develop and leverage other unique psychological strengths beyond noncognitive variables such as grit, which could effectively link their valuable traits with positive academic outcomes.

Limitations, Implications, and Future Directions

While this study contributes to a better understanding of a possible mechanism by which grit relates to academic performance, it is not without limitations. These include a limited sample and a correlational study design. First, while the sample does include students with various backgrounds, it is not necessarily a representative sample of all collegiate students. Because of this sample limitation, broader conclusions cannot be drawn about diverse populations that are not represented in this study. Second, because the study design utilized survey-based research rather than a controlled experiment, one cannot deduce causality because it is possible that other unmeasured variables may play a role in the relationship. However, the causality argument is enhanced by the temporal separation of data collected for the independent variables and GPA. Also, the objective measure of GPA being collected from the Office of Student Records reduces the risk that the mediating relationship is the result of common method bias.

This study has several implications for both students and management educators. From a student perspective, the results from this study suggest that grit characterized by perseverance and passion toward long-term goals may not directly influence academic performance. Instead, it may be possible that other state-like variables such as Academic PsyCap facilitate the strategic and contextual application of grit in relation to performance goal attainment. This study demonstrated the state-like construct of Academic PsyCap as a cognitive mechanism by which grit relates to academic performance. Specifically, the positive psychological resources of hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism help to orient the passion and perseverance of grit based on contextual cues. Thus, a student may need to simultaneously draw upon the need for both grit and Academic PsyCap when striving to reach successful academic outcomes.

Management educators can also benefit from the findings of this study. Grit has become a topic of considerable interest for those inside and outside of academia. However, the emphasis on passion and perseverance for long-term goals can at times be unbalanced. For example, Duckworth (2013) has argued that grit is as good or even a better predictor of success than cognitive ability. However, as Credé et al. (2017) have suggested, this is a strong claim given that previous research has clearly shown cognitive ability has a strong correlation with academic performance (e.g., see Sackett et al., 2012). This study’s conceptualization and results provides a more balanced perspective by suggesting that the positive association between grit and academic performance is mediated by mechanisms such as Academic PsyCap. In other words, the findings from this study indicate that the situational beliefs and psychological resources of students help explain the path by which grit is related to academic performance.

One important implication of these findings is that management educators can help students apply their grit in more effective ways through tailored Academic PsyCap development activities. Previously reviewed research has summarized the guidelines for the effective development of PsyCap (i.e., the PsyCap Intervention or PCI) with specific applications for the academic domain (see, e.g., Ertosun et al., 2015; Luthans, Avey et al., 2008; Luthans et al., 2014, for detailed descriptions of this intervention process). For innovative management education, the development of these psychological resources might help students apply and relate their grit strategically toward behaviors and attitudes that are likely to enhance, not only their desired longer-term academic performance outcomes but also their career and life goals. For example, hope development is affected by goals and pathways. In this context, management educators can guide their students to think through and generate not only short-term goals but also very long-term goals related to their educational outcomes and eventual careers. The students can then contemplate and identify potential barriers toward reaching these goals. Finally, management educators can have their students’ think of different ideas to overcome these obstacles as individuals first, followed then in a group setting, in which suggestions from peers should generate previously unconsidered alternatives and ultimately multiple pathways to success (Luthans et al., 2014).

Beyond the PCI, management educators could utilize positive boosting strategies such as interval coaching, vicarious learning, and gamification techniques within business school curricula to enhance the Academic PsyCap levels of students over the duration of their degree program. This multimodal approach emphasizes that the utilization of numerous positivity boosting strategies is more effective than a single, isolated intervention (Sin & Lyubomirsky, 2009). These strategies are also consistent with Fredrickson’s (2001) broaden-and-build theory, which suggests that promoting positive emotions can create an upward spiral of positivity and PsyCap. Ultimately, the development of these psychological resources might help students apply and relate their grit strategically toward behaviors and attitudes that are likely to enhance their desired longer-term academic performance outcomes. Contextualizing grit based on Academic PsyCap could be a mechanism by which management educators can realistically enhance their students’ recognition of the role that their grit can play in attaining their long-term educational goals and career aspirations.

There are number of ways future research can build on the findings of this study. First, this research focused on how Academic PsyCap mediated the grit and academic performance relationship. While the results indicated that the mediation relationship was found, there may be other conditions in which the mediation effect is more or less substantive. For example, future researchers may want to investigate moderators of this mediating relationship. These moderators could include psychological or contextual factors that enhance the grit and Academic PsyCap path such as conscientiousness, academic adjustment, or teacher–student exchange and/or mentoring relationship. These factors may play an important role in contextualizing the mediating effect.

In conclusion, the results from this study have provided a more nuanced conceptualization for understanding the grit and academic performance relationship. Although prior research has demonstrated that grit is at least a modest predictor of academic outcomes, additional research is required to understand the mechanisms that mediate and moderate this relationship. We hope that the results from this study provide a contribution for understanding the indirect influence psychological resources such as PsyCap in general and its components of hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism have on the relationship between grit and academic performance.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors thank the Missouri Western State University Foundation and the Logan Fund as well as the University of Nebraska Foundation and the Kelly Fund for support of this research.

References

Arsenio

W. F.

Loria

(2014). Coping with negative emotions: Connections with adolescents’ academic performance and stress. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 175(1), 76-90.

Avey

J. B.

Luthans

Jensen

S. M.

(2009). Psychological capital: A positive resource for combating employee stress and turnover. Human Resource Management, 48, 677-693.

Avey

J. B.

Nimnicht

J. L.

Pigeon

N. G.

(2010). Two field studies examining the association between positive psychological capital and employee performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31, 384-401.

Avey

J. B.

Reichard

R. J.

Luthans

Mhatre

K. H.

(2011). Meta-analysis of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors, and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 127-152.

Avey

J. B.

Wernsing

T. S.

Luthans

(2008). Can positive employees help positive organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 48-70.

Bacon

D. R.

Bean

(2006). GPA in research studies: An invaluable but neglected opportunity. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(1), 35-42.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

Baron

R. A.

Franklin

R. J.

Hmieleski

K. M.

(2013). Why entrepreneurs often experience low, not high, levels of stress: The joint effects of selection and psychological capital. Journal of Management, 42, 742-768.

Barrick

M. R.

Mount

M. K.

(1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personal Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

10.

Barrick

M. R.

Mount

M. K.

(2005). Yes, personality matters: Moving on to more important matters. Human Performance, 18, 359-372.

11.

Bashant

(2014). Developing grit in our students: Why grit is such a desirable trait, and practical strategies for teachers and schools. Journal for Leadership and Instruction, 13(2), 14-17.

12.

Bowman

N. A.

Hill

P. L.

Denson

Bronkema

(2015). Keep on truckin’ or stay the course? Exploring grit dimensions as differential predictors of educational achievement, satisfaction, and intentions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 639-645.

13.

Bridgeman

McCamley-Jenkins

Ervin

(2000). Predictions of freshman grade-point average from the revised and recentered SAT® I: Reasoning test. ETS Research Report Series, 2000(1), i-16. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-00-01-Bridgeman.pdf

14.

Chamorro-Premuzic

Furnham

(2008). Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1596-1603.

15.

Chen

H.-T.

(1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

16.

Credé

Tynan

M. C.

Harms

P. D.

(2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 492-511.

17.

Daspit

J. J.

Mims

T. C.

Zavattaro

S. M.

(2015). The role of positive psychological states in online learning: Integrating psychological capital into the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Management Education, 39, 626-649.

18.

Dawkins

Martin

Scott

Sanderson

(2013). Building on the positives: A psychometric review and critical analysis of the construct of psychological capital. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86, 348-370.

19.

de Waal

J. J.

Pienaar

. (2013). Towards understanding causality between work engagement and psychological capital. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(2), 1-10.

20.

Didier

Kreiter

C. D.

Buri

Solow

(2006). Investigating the utility of a GPA institutional adjustment index. Advances in Health Science Education, 11, 145-153.

21.

Duckworth

A. L.

(2013). The key to success? Grit. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/angela_lee_duckworth_grit_the_power_of_passion_and_persevernce

22.

Duckworth

A. L.

Kirby

T. A.

Tsukayama

Berstein

Ericsson

K. A.

(2011). Deliberate practice spells success: Why grittier competitors triumph at the National Spelling Bee. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 174-181.

23.

Duckworth

A. L.

Peterson

Matthews

M. D.

Kelly

D. R.

(2007). Grit: perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087-1101.

24.

Duckworth

A. L.

Quinn

P. D.

(2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166-174.

25.

Duckworth

A. L.

Seligman

M. E. P.

(2017). The science and practice of self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 715-718.

26.

El-Anzi

F. O.

(2005). Academic achievement and its relationship with anxiety, self-esteem, optimism, and pessimism in Kuwaiti students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33(1), 95-104.

27.

Ertosun

O. G.

Erdil

Deniz

Alpkan

(2015). Positive psychological capital development: A field study by the Solomon four group design. International Business Research, 8, 102-111.

28.

Eskreis-Winkler

Duckworth

A. L.

Shulman

E. P.

Beal

S. A.

(2014). The grit effect: Predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 36. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00036

29.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218-226.

30.

Guan

C. S.

H. L.

(2017). The mediating role of psychological capital on the association between occupational stress and job satisfaction among township cadres in a specific province of China: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14, 972-984.

31.

Hao

Liu

(2015). Association between work-family conflict and depressive symptoms among Chinese female nurses: The mediating and moderating role of psychological capital. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12, 6682-6699.

32.

Hazan Liran

Miller

P. J

. (2017). The role of psychological capital in academic adjustment among university students. Journal of Happiness Studies. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10902-017-9933-3

33.

Hochanadel

Finamore

(2015). Fixed and growth mindset in education and how grit helps students persist in the face of adversity. Journal of International Education Research, 11(1), 47-50.

34.

Hwang

M. H.

Lim

H. J.

H. S.

(2018). Effects of grit on the academic success of adult female students at Korean Open University. Psychological Reports, 121, 705-725.

35.

Ilies

Scott

B. A.

Judge

T. A.

(2006). The interactive effects of personal traits and experienced states on intraindividual patterns of citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 561-575.

36.

Johnson

V. E.

(2003). Grade inflation: A crisis in college education. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.

37.

Kanfer

(1990). Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology. In Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 75-170). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

38.

Kanfer

(1992). Work motivation: New directions in theory and research. In Cooper

C. L.

Robertson

I. T.

(Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 1-53). London, England: John Wiley.

39.

Komarraju

Karau

S. J.

Schmeck

R. R.

(2009). Role of the Big Five personality traits in predicting college students’ academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1), 47-52.

40.

Korbin

J. L.

Patterson

B. F.

Shaw

E. J.

Mattern

K. D.

Barbuti

S. M.

(2008). Validity of the SAT for predicting first-year college grade point average. New York, NY: College Board.

41.

Kranzler

J. H.

Jensen

A. R.

(1989). Inspection time and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 13, 329-347.

42.

Kuncel

N. R.

Crede

Thomas

L. L.

(2007). A meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) and Undergraduate Grade Point Average (UGPA) for graduate student academic performance. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1), 51-68.

43.

Kuncel

N. R.

Hezlett

S. A.

Ones

D. S.

(2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 162-181.

44.

Kuncel

N. R.

Hezlett

S. A.

Ones

D. S.

(2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148-161.

45.

Lanaj

Chang

C. H.

Johnson

R. E.

(2012). Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 998-1034.

46.

Kan

Liu

Shi

Wang

Yang

. . . Wu

(2015). The mediating role of psychological capital on the association between occupational stress and job burnout among bank employees in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12, 2984-3001.

47.

Luthans

B. C.

Luthans

K. W.

Avey

J. B.

(2014). Building the leaders of tomorrow: The development of academic psychological capital. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21, 191-199.

48.

Luthans

B. C.

Luthans

K. W.

Jensen

(2012). The impact of business school students’ psychological capital on academic performance. Journal of Education for Business, 87, 253-259.

49.

Luthans

(2002a). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695-706.

50.

Luthans

(2002b). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 57-72.

51.

Luthans

Avey

J. B.

Avolio

B. J.

Norman

S. M.

Combs

(2006), Psychological capital development: Toward a micro-intervention. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 387-393.

52.

Luthans

Avey

J. B.

Avolio

B. J.

Peterson

S. J.

(2010). The development and resulting performance impact of positive psychological capital. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 41-67.

53.

Luthans

Avey

J. B.

Patera

(2008). Experimental analysis of a web-based training intervention to develop psychological capital. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 209-221.

54.

Luthans

Avolio

Avey

J. B.

Norman

S. M.

(2007). Psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and job satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60, 541-572.

55.

Luthans

K. W.

Luthans

B. C.

(2004). Positive psychological capital: Beyond human and social capital. Business Horizons, 47(1), 45-50.

56.

Luthans

Norman

S. M.

Avolio

B. J.

Avey

J. B.

(2008). The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational culture-employee performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 219-238.

57.

Luthans

Youssef

C. M.

Avolio

B. J.

(2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

58.

Luthans

Youssef-Morgan

(2017). Psychological capital: An evidenced-based positive approach. Annual Reviews of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 339-366.

59.

Luthans

K. W.

Luthans

B. C.

Palmer

N. F.

(2016). A positive approach to management education: The relationship between academic PsyCap and student engagement. Journal of Management Development, 35(9), 1-22.

60.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Coxe

Baraldi

A. N.

(2012). Guidelines for the investigation of mediating variables in business research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 1-14.

61.

Martin

A. J.

Marsh

H. W.

(2006). Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct validity approach. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 267-281.

62.

Masten

(2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes and development. American Psychologist, 56, 227-239.

63.

Masten

A. S.

Reed

M. G. J.

(2002). Resilience in development. In Snyder

C. R.

Lopez

S. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74-88). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

64.

Mathe

Scott-Halsell

Kim

Krawczyk

(2014). Psychological capital in the quick service restaurant industry: A study of unit-level performance. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 41, 823-845.

65.

O’Connor

M. C.

Paunonen

S. V.

(2007). Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 971-990.

66.

Palisoc

A. J. L.

Matsumoto

R. R.

Perry

P. J.

Tang

T. T.

E. J.

(2017). Relationship between grit with academic performance and attainment of postgraduate training in pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(4), 1-10.

67.

Paterson

T. A.

Luthans

Jeung

(2014). Thriving at work: Impact of psychological capital and supervisor support. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 434-446.

68.

Perkins-Gough

(2013). The significance of grit: A conversation with Angela Lee Duckworth. Educational Leadership, 71(1), 14-20.

69.

Plant

E. A.

Ericsson

K. A.

Hill

Asberg

(2005). Why study time does not predict grade point average across college students: Implications of deliberate practice for academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 96-116.

70.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.

71.

Qingquan

Zongkui

(2009). Relationships among psychological capital, coping style and mental health of impoverished college students. China Journal of Health Psychology, 7(1), 18-29.

72.

Richardson

Abraham

Bond

(2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353-387.

73.

Rojas

J. P.

(2015). The relationships among creativity, grit, academic motivation, and academic success in college students (Unpublished dissertation). University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.

74.

Roth

P. L.

BeVier

C. A.

Switzer

F. S.

III Schippmann

J. S.

(1996). Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 548-556.

75.

Sackett

P. R.

Kuncel

N. R.

Beatty

A. S.

Rigdon

J. L.

Shen

Kiger

T. B.

(2012). The role of socioeconomic status in the SAT-grade relationships and in college admissions decisions. Psychological Science, 23, 1000-1007.

76.

Salgado

J. F.

(1997). The five-factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 30-45.

77.

Sansone

Wiebe

D. J.

Morgan

(1999). Self-regulating interest: The moderating role of hardiness and conscientiousness. Journal of Personality, 67, 701-733.

78.

Schneider

S. L.

(2001). In search of realistic optimism. American Psychologist, 56, 250-263.

79.

Schulz

S. A.

Luthans

K. W.

Messersmith

J. G.

(2014). Psychological capital: A new tool for driver retention. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 44, 621-634.

80.

Seligman

M. E. P.

(1998). Learned optimism. New York, NY: Pocket Books.

81.

Seligman

M. E. P.

Csikszentmihalyi

(2000). Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.

82.

Simbula

Guglielmi

Schaufeli

W. B.

(2011). A three-wave study of job resources, self-efficacy and work engagement among Italian school teachers. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 285-304.

83.

Sin

N. L.

Lyubomirsky

(2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 467-487.

84.

Siu

O. L.

Bakker

A. B.

Jiang

(2014). Psychological capital among university students: Relationships with study engagement and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 979-994.

85.

Snyder

C. R.

(2000). Handbook of hope. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

86.

Snyder

C. R.

Irving

L. M.

Anderson

J. R.

(1991). Hope and health. In Snyder

C. R.

Forsyth

D. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of social and clinical psychology: The health perspective (pp. 285-305). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.

87.

Snyder

C. R.

Shorey

H. S.

Cheavens

Pulvers

K. M.

Adams

V. H.

III Wiklund

(2002). Hope and academic success in college. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 820-826.

88.

Solberg

N. L.

Evans

D. R.

Swgerstrom

S. C.

(2009). Optimism and college retention: Mediation by motivation, performance, and adjustment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 1887-1912.

89.

Stajkovic

A. D.

Luthans

(1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240-261.

90.

Strayhorn

T. L.

(2014). What role does grit play in the academic success of black male collegians at predominantly white institutions? Journal of African American Studies, 18(1), 1-10.

91.

Swick

K. J.

(1987). Student stress: A classroom management system. Analysis and action series. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED307514

92.

Tett

R. P.

Jackson

D. N.

Rothstein

(1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.

93.

Tjakraatmadja

J. H.

Febriansyah

(2007). The influence of psychological capital and learning environment toward SBM-ITB students’ GPA. Indonesian Journal for the Science of Management, 6(1), 1-13.

94.

Valentine

J. C.

DuBois

D. L.

Cooper

(2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39, 111-133.

95.

Wasonga

Christman

D. E.

Kilmer

(2003). Ethnicity, gender and age: Predicting resilience and academic achievement among urban high school students. American Secondary Education, 32(1), 62-74.

96.

Willingham

D. T.

(2016). Ask the cognitive scientist: “Grit” is trendy, but can it be taught? American Educator, 40(2), 28-32.

97.

Wolters

C. A.

Hussain

(2015). Investigating grit and its relations with college students’ self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 10, 293-311.

98.

Zeldin

A. L.

Pajares

(2000). Against the odds: Self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and technological careers. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 215-246.